The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1887-05-06

When licenses were called up on Monday
afternoon the Court room was full of peo-
pie. About fifty ladies, of Espy, were
present to hear the testimony In the case Of
Jacob Blosser, an applicant for a hotel Ii
cense at that place. Mr.. Howell represent
ed the applicant and Messrs. E. II. & II. Il.
Little and j. NJ. e. Ranck, the opposition.
A remonstrance containing 226 names was
filed. and number Of witnesses we're called
on each side. Some testimony was offered
on behalf of the remonstrants TO show that
Mr.. Blosser was not competent to keep a
and that he employed man to conduct the
business for him, who was of incorporate
habits; that strangers had been refused
meals and lodging, and that liquor had
been sold to men when intoxicated; that
there was sometimes crowd in front OF
the hotel so that persons passing were
obliged to go out into the street. On be-
half of the applicant 1t was contended that
Espy has nearly 500 inhabitants, and that a
hotel is necessary for the accommodation Of
the travelling public; that 1t has been IL
| censed for many years, and that no viola
| ton of the law occurred while Blosser had
| license for the house, in 1885. Fifteen
witnesses were called.
On the argument it was urged by the op-
position that the petition does not set forth
that license to sell liquor at that place is
necessary, but reads that there is a neces-
sty for the house. A distinction was made
between the necessity for the house and a
necessity for a license to sell liquor. Judge
| Dreher then remarked that if the granting
of licenses depended upon the necessity
| of licenses to sell liquor, he would refuse
every application that came before him,
| but as he understood the law, 1t was the
necessity for public house for the accom-.
mediation of the travelling public, and the
entertainment Of strangers and travellers
that the courts are obliged to consider A
| question was also raised as to the suffic-
iency of Blosser's bond, it being signed by
two persons whose names were on the pc
ttion, but who were not residents of Scott
township.
"A remonstrance was also filed against the
petition of A. j. Thrash, an applicant for q
hotel license at Lightstrect 1t was signed
by 72 names, mostly females. A supple
mental petition was presented by Mr.. Zarr
containing 70 names, a few of whom re-
sided out of the township. No witnesses
were called on either side, and the cast
was submitted on the papers, after argu
ment by Mr.. Little and Mr. Zarr.
A. Ii. Fulmer's application for hote
license at Eyer's Grove was next called, L.
S. Wintersteen for the applicant. The frs
objection raised was that the applicant hat
not signed his name to the petition, and as
he was about to sign it in Court, Mr.. Little
objected, that it was too late to sign now
Judge Dreher remarked that if it was toe
late, his signature would not mend it.
number Of witnesses were examined in be.
half of the applicant. The opposition
called no witnesses, stating that they reliet
on the remonstrance and the cross-exami
patton of witnesses. There were AZ names
on the remonstrance.
Edward j. Haffey was new applicant
for restaurant in Centralia. There was
no special remonstrance against it, Sey
eral witnesses were examined as to tht
character of the applicant, the convenience
of the house, &c.
Norman Cole was an applicant for res
taurant in Sugarloaf. He was sworn OIL
his own behalf.
Michael j. Ryan asked for restauran
license in Centraia. The Court held al
these cases under advisement
The application of B. E. Long was with
drawn.